The [climate change ] study group was formed following the very successful BSA Presidential Debate ‘How to put society into climate change’ held at the British Library in February 2010. As that event demonstrated, sociology has an increasingly important role to play in shaping and contributing to public and policy debate about climate change. The study group provides a forum in which to explore how to effectively bring sociology’s unique perspective to bear on this most pressing of challenges. The study group is open to all sociologists, from whatever specialism and at whatever stage they may be at in their career

This event provides members of the BSA climate change study group with an informal opportunity to meet some of the people involved in social science related research in the Department of Energy and Climate Change. Those who attend will get a chance to learn more about how research influences policy, and about what makes social science useful. There will be opportunities to discuss current and future research priorities, to hear about methods of commissioning and using research, and about experiences of working with policy.

I preferred BSA when they made motorbikes. - James P is one of many Bishop Hill commenters who is unimpressed by the activities of the British Sociological Association, who are trying to insert sociology into the CAGW debate. To make people believe in CAGW, with further doomed attempts along these lines?... ...

Reader Comments (39)

It will be fascinating in about 50 years' time to read sociologists on why sociologists were taken in by CAGW.

Question for the BSA – what sociological techniques could persuade a person to impoverish themselves and their children to tackle a poorly defined hazard that will only severely affect other people, if any, and has no viable solution?

The only answers I can think of are intensive psychological brainwashing involving incarceration and torture or threatening the person with a more immediate hazard eg a machine gun.

But what do I know? Perhaps we could try a naughty step system or some kind of coloured sticker offer for good CO2 behaviour?

I’m rapidly coming to the conclusion the reason sceptics and believers have so little common ground is because we really do live on different planets.

Sociologists being consulted on climate science (or any physical science problem) is like inviting moneylenders into the temple. Drive the vermin out, don't invite them in. Sociology is nothing more than subjective (and often merely trendy) categorization falsely elevated to the status of fact; applied to the current (completely incompetent) climate consensus, it is like giving a child a loaded, hair-trigger revolver. Must I remind you of the Insane Left again, and what "insane" means? (It means war -- first, and above all, for men's minds.)

"...‘How to put society into climate change’ held at the British Library in February 2010. As that event demonstrated, sociologysocialism has an increasingly important role to play in shaping and contributing to public and policy debate about climate change."

After this little lot I'm beginning to wonder whether sociologists actually perform any useful functions at all in the real world. Is it not possible that everything they get up to is just as mindless and shallow as this effort?

I'd lump Sociologists (what on Earth do they actually contribute to "society"?) in with those psychologists who wanted to establish climate deniers as mentally ill requiring Stalin like rehabilitation a few years ago! I seem to recall somebdy saying that the real lunatics were the ones who were acting the most sane!

Beam down to ExCeL from 19-21 October with mores guests, themed parties, interactive activities, professional photo shoots, autograph sessions, original sets, props and displays, memorabilia, talks and stunt displays plus more to be announced. Plus Five captains beaming down - William Shatner, Patrick Stewart, Avery Brooks, Kate Mulgrew and Scott Bakula!So whether you have been a fan since the very first season back in 1966 or a recent convert with the 2009 movie there will be something for every fan.

or

Battle of Ideas at the Barbican this weekend.They got a debate about Shale and some stuff about trusting Scientists.

I mean, please. Do me a buggering favour. Here we have fully paid-up members of every right-on, bien-pensant, government-funded eco movement, encouraging and reinforcing each other at every turn, and suggesting what?

That they be listened to, that they be indulged, that they instantly obeyed.

This is beyond incest. It is a kind of appalling, self-congratulatory wank-fest.

Yet not only do these smarmy types expect to be taken seriously, they expect, indeed demand, to be funded.

More horrifyingly still, they are.

And still the BBC, Guardian, Indy, Milliband, Balls and crew moan about cuts.

Cuts my flaming arse.

I apologise for my intemperate language. Not my usual style.

But talk about blood reaching boiling point . . .

This is what happens when the counter-culture –groovy, far out and never wrong – becomes the new establishment.

It seems after all this time of heightened propaganda that climate change should be a palpable thing we shouldn't be arguing over - but it doesn't seem to be working out that way does it?

I suggest we see here that these people have abstracted climate change to such an extent that they have forgot where they came from, or what they mean, and now need to artificially inject meaning back into their construct(s).

I.e. they feel the need to inject the “customer” back into the subject they make so much capital out of.

To put this succinctly, the sociologists have seen how much money is being given to DECC to splash out on global warming, and they want a cut. I hope this does not end up with something like the furore over the Lewandowsky paper. http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2012/8/29/lewandowskys-conspiracy-paper-goes-mainstream.html

I hope this does not end up with something like the furore over the Lewandowsky paper.

A "furore"? Where? The gobshite L. got some critical attention from intelligent people and continues on blithely un "furored" as far as I can see - ("furore" - which means the public get a chance to give a hoot ;) )

L. continues on being adored by morons knowing he risks no chance of being molested by any "furore" ;)

Maybe like with the Jimmy Savile case we will have to wait many years until times are more accepting to hear the truth? ;)

BS Association, sounds about right. This is all so 2007, while in the here and now the energy policy rationalists are progressively wresting control from the eco-freaks. My advice to the luvvies is to move on to the next big scare - this one's already burnt toast.

TRE: Professional Engineers see through climate pseudo-science because it assumes the Earth radiates IR as an isolated black body in a vacuum, impossible because convection and radiation are coupled. With the other main heat transfer error at TOA, the models are based on a perpetual motion machine.There can be no significant CO2-AGW. The claimed positive feedback is imaginary.

This has been 30 years of wasted work. I do hope Trenberth, Hansen, Mann and others face appropriate nemesis. Also, I hope this will be a lesson to those disciplines where practitioners are trained in the correct heat transfer principles but have gone along with the fraud out of carelessness.

Planetary Cancer: Growth Economy and Culture in an Era of Climate CrisisSaturday 9th March 2013The University of Warwick

CALL FOR PAPERS

The struggle to understand, manage, and represent the problems concerning human activity on this planet is a struggle for the survival of our species. This conference will establish a space for dialogue between three disciplines: Marxist ecology; food security; and environmental literature.

Sorry I’ve arrived too late to join in the discussion. As a sour postscript, can I say that the social sciences are one of the proudest achievements of our modern (post enlightenment) world? The fact that the BS Association is eager to lick the green welly is neither here nor there. We need the insights of social science to understand what’s gone wrong - politically, socially and mentally wrong.